page 1 Nine months experience with LSF in ECA/SECA Zones Niels Bjørn Mortensen 06.10.15 Maersk Maritime Technology
page 2 Agenda 1. Why is Maersk interested in SOx emission regulations? 2. What are the experiences so far? 3. What are the challenges from our point of view? 06.10.15
SOx & NOx regulations: Emission Control Areas - ECA SOx and NOx Emission Control Areas Maersk Maritime Technology Slide no. 3
Maersk Maritime Technology page 4 New ECAs in China? Areas for low sulphur fuel: Pearl River Delta Yangtze River Delta Bohai Bay Cold ironing 90% by 2020.
Title of presentation page 5 New ECAs in Mexico and NSW?
page 6 Why is Maersk interested in SOx emission regulations? Non-compliance will create an uneven playing field, which means that the companies that comply with the SOx regulations are getting punished for doing so Maersk alone spends 200 million $ a year to comply with the current SOx regulations, when the global cap comes this number will increase many fold There is significant financial incentive, therefor there is a risk of widespread non-compliance
Why is SOX special compared to other current rules? Ballast Water: NOX Tier III: Inherent carriage requirement Inherent carriage requirement SOX: Purely operational evidence of compliance is basically a piece of paper with no standard format. The cheating bonus can run into $millions 06.10.15
50 mill. tons of oil out of Primorsk + 25 mill tons out of Ust Luga annually. An Aframax tanker can save USD 100,000+ on a voyage from the Atlantic to Primorsk and back again by burning HFO instead of MGO. Distance sailed within the ECA: ~3300 NM 06.10.15 Slide no. 8 Regulatory Affairs (50 t/day in 10 days; price gap 200$)
page 9 Such a ship can save 1000$ / hour
Title of presentation page 10 Experiences so far with fuel switching Maersk Line made 2399 fuel switches in Californian Waters (HFO -> MGO and vice versa) from 2006 2015. Two incidents of L.O.P. (due to not following procedures). No incidents in 2015 in North Europe or North America. One incident of too high sulphur due to leaking valve in fuel system (MT) One incident with contaminated MGO (ML)
page 11 Will non-compliance be widespread? History shows countless examples of cheating in the shipping and bunkering industry: Magic pipes to circumvent OWS Magic pipes to transfer cargo oil into bunker tanks Falsified or fake Bunker Delivery Notes (BDN) Falsified adjustment of Oil Record Books Hidden tanks Turning off AIS Bunker cheating (through quantity short delivery) is about 2% - which runs up to 100+ million a year for Maersk alone and more than 1 billion dollar a year in the industry 06.10.15
Title of presentation page 12 Statistics for inspections and compliance According to the latest findings from EMSA s, based on data in THETIS-S, from 1. Januar till July 2015, 3821 inspections of fuel were carried out in EU (document control). Non-compliance-rate was 6,04 %. At some of the 3821 inspections, a sample of fuel used was taken. It amounts to 622 samples. Non-compliance rate of those samples was 5,95 %. Is that satisfactory?
Maersk Maritime Technology Slide no. 13 What are the challenges from our point of view? What are the challenges from our point of view? What are the challenges from our point of view?
1. Detection of non-compliance is very difficult Inspections are mostly limited to ports How to detect ships that shift over just before calling on a port? Share of ships caught in port inspections is likely a poor indication of non-compliance level National boundaries limits the efficiency of compliance control How do we control that switch-over to HFO does not happen pre-maturely prior to leaving an ECA zone? How do we ensure compliance of the EU 0.5% is kept within the EEZ? What about Canary islands and the Azores? Today there is no easy solution for detection in high seas page 14
page 15 2. Penalties are often not effective, proportionate and dissuasive In many countries penalties are not effective, proportionate and dissuasive : Penalties down to fines as low as 1500 compared to savings on 90-100.000$ per trip, per ship! Very few detentions. Norwegian Maritime Authority found the vessel Sardius, owned by Dutch company De Bock Maritiem BV to have breached the 0.10% sulphur limit within the ECA twice. The fine was NOK 100,000 (approximately $12,200).
page 16 3. There are some legal challenges Unclear who will police and enforce regulations in EEZ and international waters Who can ensure that a Flag State actually fulfils its obligations and sanction ships flying its flag? Uncertainty on penalizing beyond national jurisdiction - what part of the voyage can be penalized by the port state? Which detection methods will stand in court as evidence?
EU 2020 0.50% S regime: Title of presentation page 17
EU 2020 0.50% S regime: Challenge in the Strait of Gibraltar 06.10.15 Slide no. 18 Regulatory Affairs
Global Cap 2020 or 2025??? Maersk Maritime Technology Slide no. 19 Will we know before 2018? What is the likelihood of 2020? Will harmonization of Flashpoints, if accepted in IMO, play a role? Can the Global Cap be enforced in the middle of the Pacific Ocean?? 06.10.15
Testing a Continuous Emission Monitoring System (CEMS) technology on Maersk Montana Goal: Evaluate the possibility of reliable onboard measurement of SOx emissions and transmission of the data via satellite Identify the advantages and disadvantages of such a system first hand (evaluate technology, operational criteria etc.) Status: Installation has been tried during port stay, but has failed. Installation to be done during docking Pro: Allows first-hand monitoring on high seas Cons: Hard and expensive to install, only possibly when the ship is in dock Installation on board the vessel, makes tampering possible page 20
Maersk Maritime Technology Slide no. 21 Global Cap how to enforce, even with CEMS? and who cares??? 06.10.15
page 10 The Trident Alliance: working for a robust enforcement of the sulphur regulation A shipping network, with the 35 leading shipping companies (so far) Spreading awareness Working for strong enforcement Drive solution strategies for a robust and efficient enforcement
At the end of the day it s all about maintaining a level playing field. MMT - Regulatory Affairs Slide no. 23
Maersk Maritime Technology Slide no. 24 THANK YOU 06.10.15